Mining madness
Trump's latest order throws multiple-use, environmental safeguards into the dirt

Last week, President Trump signed an executive order – his 150th so far this term, by my rough count –  invoking the Defense Production Act to expedite mining on federal lands. The wording of the order suggests that the aim is not just to cut through red tape hindering proposed projects but to incite the industry to mine areas that it may not have been considering previously.

The order has understandably alarmed public lands advocates, but it has also spawned some misconceptions, particularly concerning the 1872 General Mining Law.

While Trump’s attacks on the nation and public lands have been unprecedented so far, his use of the Cold War-era DPA is not all that unusual. The Carter administration used it to justify pouring billions of dollars of subsidies into “synfuel” production as part of its quest for “energy independence.” This sparked massive oil shale operations in western Colorado (which crashed spectacularly). And Biden used the Act to encourage mining for so-called “green metals,” such as lithium, boron and manganese. He also streamlined permitting for the proposed Hermosa manganese mine in southern Arizona and loaned the contested Thacker Pass lithium mine in Nevada $2.6 billion.

But Trump’s order goes much further. He is expanding the list of target minerals to just about everything, including “critical minerals, uranium, copper, potash, gold and any other element, compound or material as determined by the Chair of the National Energy Dominance Council, such as coal.” While Biden wanted a survey of the nation’s mineral production capacity and promised to adhere to all existing environmental laws and consult with tribal nations, Trump is ordering his agencies to:

• Compile a list of all proposed mining projects “in order to expedite the review of those projects in coordination with the National Energy Dominance Council.”

• Amend or revise land use plans under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act to “support the intent of this order.”

• “Identify as many sites as possible that might be suitable for mineral production that can be permitted as soon as possible.”

• Prioritize mineral production over other activities on federal lands.

• Provide financing, loans and investment for new mines, including from a “dedicated critical minerals fund established through the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation.”

• Make new “recommendations to Congress regarding treatment of waste rock, tailings and mine waste under the Mining Act of 1872.”

Instead of adhering to environmental laws, Trump would alter them to support mining. He not only wants to help proposed projects with regulatory and financial subsidies but also wants to spur on “as many sites as possible.” And he is prioritizing mineral extraction over all other activities on federal lands, a blatant violation of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act’s multiple-use mandate.

That would mean not only that mining would take precedence over conservation and recreation, but also livestock grazing and other extractive uses. The OHV crowd that’s worried about the BLM closing a few roads to motorized vehicles around Moab might just find themselves ousted from a lot more areas by potash ponds, uranium mines or lithium operations.

Trump’s recommendations to Congress likely will be to tweak the 1872 Mining Law to ensure that mining companies can store waste on public mining claims that aren’t valid, meaning that they have not proven that the parcels contain valuable minerals. This was actually the norm until 2022, when a federal judge ruled that the proposed Rosemont copper mine in Arizona could not store its tailings and waste on public land. That ruling was followed by a similar one in 2023, leading politicians from both parties to try to restore the pre-Rosemont Decision rules.

It’s around the General Mining Law that misconceptions have arisen. The award-winning filmmakers and conservationists the Pattiz Brothers, of “More Than Just Parks,” a Substack newsletter, say the new order “doesn’t create a new legal framework. It exhumes an old one – a fossil from the 19th century … It’s the Mining Act of 1872, back from the dead, and now wearing body armor.” Which is a nice way to put it, but the Mining Act never died, so this order can’t revive it.

The other misconception appeared in Lands Lost, another great Substack focusing on public lands, which wrote: “… there are no meaningful environmental safeguards in place because public land mining is a free-for-all governed only by an 1872 law that’s never been modernized.”

It’s true that the 1872 Mining Law is inadequate, allowing mining companies or individuals to stake a claim to any public land without public input or environmental review, conduct exploratory work with a minimum of review, and pay no royalties on hardrock minerals they extract. However, federal agencies do have additional regulations governing mining. Before a company can do any mining, it must get an operating permit from the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service or Department of Energy (depending on the land’s jurisdiction), which includes an environmental review (either an EA or a more extensive EIS). A mine may also need a Clean Water Act permit for any water discharges, including adits, and many states require additional permits as well.

By ordering agencies to alter the FLPMA land-use plans, Trump is essentially doing away with these additional safeguards, which really is scary. That would take us back to a time when the 1872 Mining Law was the only federal regulatory framework, which would give mining companies free rein to trash public lands. However, Trump can’t do much about state requirements, except to try to bully them out of existence.

The order applies only to federal lands, so mining projects that are on patented mining claims – which are entirely on private land – would not be affected (although they might be eligible for government handouts).

Proposed projects this fast-tracking could affect include:

• Resolution Copper’s proposed copper mine at Chi’chil Bi?dagoteel, aka Oak Flat, in central Arizona.

• Copper World Complex, née Rosemont Mine, in the Santa Rita Mountains south of Tucson. After a judge kiboshed Canada-based Hudbay’s plan to dump mine waste on Forest Service land, the firm decided to base the initial phase on patented, i.e. private, mining claims and later expand to public lands.

• South32’s proposed Hermosa Mine in the Patagonia Mountains of southern Arizona. Biden already fast-tracked permitting for this battery-grade manganese mine, but Trump’s order could speed it along.

• Energy Fuels’ Roca Honda uranium mine and Laramide Resources’ La Jara Mesa uranium project, both on Forest Service land near Grants, N.M.

• Anson/A1’s proposed lithium extraction projects and American Potash’s lithium and potash projects on BLM land east and north of Moab and south of Green River, Utah.

• Lithium, copper and uranium projects on BLM land in the Lisbon Valley in southeastern Utah.

• Numerous proposed uranium mining projects on Energy Department leases and BLM land in the Uravan Mineral Belt in western Colorado.

• Atomic Minerals’ uranium prospects on Harts Point, just outside the boundaries of Bears Ears National Monument.

• Metallic Minerals is only doing exploratory drilling on its mining claims in the La Plata Mountains of southwestern Colorado and has yet to make any mining plans public, so it’s not clear whether Trump’s order would affect this contested project.

Learn more about these and other projects with the Land Desk’s Mining Monitor Map.

The Land Desk is a newsletter from Jonathan P. Thompson, author of “River of Lost Souls,” “Behind the Slickrock Curtain” and “Sagebrush Empire.” To subscribe, go to: www.landdesk.org.